Ted Bundy is obviously one of the most iconic, written-about serial killers in history. Why a book about Ted Bundy? What’s the untold story that you set out to uncover?

The desire, or drive, if you will, to write an article about Ted Bundy and then create a 120,000 plus word book about the murders, was born out of my crossing paths with his infamous murder kit. Had Jerry Thompson [a key detective on the Bundy case -ed.] left Bundy’s stuff in Utah that May of 2005, well, it would have been an enjoyable meeting with the former detective, but I’m certain it would have all ended quietly there. Indeed, I doubt if I’d even considered writing an article for Snitch [a now-defunct crime magazine -ed.], much less a book about the killings. But it was having all that stuff in my hands, and in my home, and then being given one of the Glad bags from Ted’s VW that made it very real (or surreal) to me, and from this, a hunger to find out more about the crimes led me forward.

Ted Bundy’s gear, right where you want it — image courtesy of Kevin M. Sullivan. (Check the 1975 police photo for confirmation.)

Believe me, in a thousand years, I never would have expected such a thing to ever come my way. I can’t think of anything more odd or surreal.

ET: You mentioned that you think you’ve been able to answer some longstanding questions about Bundy’s career. Can you give us some hints? What don’t people know about Ted Bundy that they ought to know?

I must admit, when I first decided to write a book about the crimes, I wasn’t sure what I’d find, so the first thing I had to do was read every book ever written about Bundy, which took the better portion of three or four months.

From this I took a trip to Utah to again meet with Thompson and check out the sites pertaining to Bundy and the murders in that state. Next came the acquisition of case files from the various states and the tracking down of those detectives who participated in the hunt for the elusive killer.

Now, no one could have been more surprised than me to begin discovering what I was discovering about some of these murders. But as I kept hunting down the right people and the right documents, I was able to confirm these “finds” at every turn. And while I cannot reveal everything here, It’s all in the book in great detail. Indeed, you could say that my book is not a biography in the truest sense, but rather an in-depth look at Bundy and the murders from a vantage point that is quite unique. I wish I could delve further into these things now , but I must wait until it’s published.

The Bundy story has a magnetic villain and a host of victims … was there a hero? Was there a lesson?

The real heroes in this story are the detectives who worked day and night for years to bring Ted Bundy to justice. And if there’s a lesson to be learned from all of this, it is this: It doesn’t matter how handsome or articulate a person might be, or how nicely they smile at you, for behind it all, there could reside the most diabolical person you’ll ever meet! We need to remember this.

But how can you act on that lesson without living in a continual state of terror? Bundy strikes me as so far outside our normal experience, even the normal experience of criminality, that I’m inclined to wonder how much can be generalized from him.

Actually, (and I might say, thank God here!) people as “successful” as Ted Bundy don’t come our way very often. I mean, the guy was a rising star in the Republican Party in Washington, had influential friends, a law student, and certainly appeared to be going places in life. Some were even quite envious of his ascension in life. However, it was all a well-placed mask that he wore to cover his true feelings and intentions. On the outside he was perfect, but on the inside a monster. He just didn’t fit the mold we’re used to when we think of a terrible killer, does he?

Now, there are those among us — sociopaths — who can kill or do all manner of terrible things in life and maintain the nicest smile upon their faces, but again, just beneath the surface ticks the heart of a monster, or predator, or what ever you might want to call them. Having said that, I’m not a suspicious person by nature, and so I personally judge people by their outward appearance until shown otherwise. Still, it’s difficult (if not impossible) to see the “real” individual behind the person they present to us on a daily basis.

You worked with case detectives in researching your book. How did the Ted Bundy case affect the way law enforcement has subsequently investigated serial killers? If they had it to do over again, what’s the thing you think they’d have done differently?

They all agree that today, DNA would play a part of the investigation that wasn’t available then. However, in the early portion of the murders, Bundy made few if any mistakes, as he had done his homework so as to avoid detection. As such, even this wouldn’t be a panacea when it came to a very mobile killer like Bundy who understood the very real limitations sometimes surrounding homicide investigations.

I can’t help but ask about these detectives as human beings, too. Clearly they’re in a position to deal with the heart of darkness in the human soul day in and day out and still lead normal lives … is a Ted Bundy the kind of killer that haunts or scars investigators years later, or is this something most can set aside as all in a day’s work?

They are, first of all, very nice people. And you can’t be around them (either in person, or through numerous phone calls or emails) for very long before you understand how dedicated they are (or were) in their careers as police officers. They are honorable people, with a clear sense of duty, and without such people, we, as a society, would be in dire circumstances indeed.

Even before Bundy came along, these men were veteran investigators who had seen many bad things in life, so they carried a toughness which allowed them to deal with the situations they came up against in a professional manner. That said, I remember Jerry Thompson telling me how he looked at Ted one day and thought how much he reminded him of a monster, or a vampire of sorts. And my book contains a number of exchanges between the two men (including a chilling telephone call) which demonstrate why he felt this way

How about for you, as a writer — was there a frightening, creepy, traumatic moment in your research that really shook you? Was there an emotional toll for you?

Absolutely. But the degree of “shock”, if you will, depends (at least for me) on what I know as I first delve into each murder. In the Bundy cases I had a general knowledge of how Bundy killed, so there wasn’t a great deal that caught me by surprise, as it were. Even so, as a writer, you tend to get to know the victims very well through the case files, their family members or friends, and so on. Hence, I’ll continue to carry with me many of the details of their lives and deaths for the remainder of my life. And so, lasting changes are a part of what we do.

However, I did a story a few years back about a 16 year old girl who was horribly murdered here in Kentucky, and this case did cause me to wake up in the night in a cold sweat. Perhaps it was because I have a daughter that was, at the time, only a few years younger than this girl, and that some of what transpired did catch me off guard, so to speak, as I began uncovering just what had happened to this very nice kid.

Watch for Kevin M. Sullivan’s forthcomingThe Bundy Murders: A Comprehensive History from McFarland in summer or fall of 2009.

* In fact, the term “serial killer” was coined in the 1970’s by FBI profiler Robert Ressler, as an improvement on the sometimes inaccurate category of “stranger killer”.

8,465 thoughts on “1989: Ted Bundy, psycho killer”

Comment navigation

If you bothered to read the hundreds of pages where bundy explains what he did and why he did it(and i understand he lied a lot) things are very clear.Your mistake is intermingling your personal experiences with that of a vicious killer who had tenuous knowledge of due to a relationship with another convict.Very niave.There is no doubt why ted killed who he killed.If you want to tell a story.tell it as it is and tell it well.It has nothing to do with you personally.By the way those sketches are fakes too

One more thing.When ted was arrested in78 they found cheerleader magazines in his car.Its on the evidence list for all to see.You can stare at a dime all day long,Richard,but it will always be a dime,never a quarter.

I have bothered to read all of that and a whole lot more. Did you ever think that, if he lied a lot, things cannot possibly be “very clear.”

My personal involvement came at Bundy’s behest. He was seeking someone who could understand him, someone of a similar age and background. He wanted to find someone with whom he could explore his true feelings and someone who, for the rest of us, could articulate those feelings.

If my connection with Bundy was tenuous perhaps you can explain why I have letters in his handwriting, some of his family photographs, and photographs of his other art. You also have to explain how I could have known about souvenir photographs, buried bodies, and the medallion he was wearing during his interview with Dobson. You also have to explain who, besides Ted, knew that he had at least once disguised his handwriting. You also have to explain how the “fisherman story” was leaked, That’s just some of it.

If, as you say, you know why Ted killed who he killed, why don’t you let everyone else know? I’m sure there are still families and friends who are looking for that information.

I am telling the story as it is – not as others want it to be. One knows one has found the truth when nobody, including myself, likes it.

If the sketches were faked, who did it? Here’s a hint. Bobby could not draw that well. That means you’re saddled with a conspiracy theory. I’ll give you some help. The co-conspirator is a lefty He has to be a prison guard even though any guard found to be in cahoots with Bobby would lose his job. He had to be an artist. He had to be willing to fork over cash to frame one of the pieces of art. And the sole purpose of this conspiracy was to fool me into buying art worth ten dollars apiece for ten dollars apiece. Dumb!

Richard i bought your book and read it with great interest..I think we can agree that ted bundy was unique in many ways.However we have a man who killed30-50 women within a general stereotype.He engaged in necrophiliac practices with their dead and rotting corpses on multiple ocassions.Plus he had normal so to speak sexual relations with women.You never spoke to bundy personally.Your theory such as it is backed by nothing but a personal agenda of your own

If you learned but one thing from the Bundy case it should be never to trust appearances. You overlook the fact that, gays are inexorably encumbered by a pervasive social condemnation. This affects how and if they express their true sexuality. Some openly act on their feelings regardless; some act in the shadows to avoid social condemnation; some slip on the guise of being straight. They seek not only to avoid social condemnation but also to receive society’s affirmation. They may marry and rear children. They may never act on their true feelings. They appear to others to be straight.

People “cannot be expected to see or suspect ‘repressed homosexuality,’ especially if the symptoms are manifested in the form of males becoming ultra masculine and violent, and/or if they are having sex with as many females as possible.” [“The Homosexuality Factor in Social Violence” by Pierre J Tremblay]

Do you know of anyone who was known to have engaged in disguise? Here’s a hint: His fellow prisoners called him a “master of disguise.”

I see that you consider someone who harbors a “well-masked anger toward women” [Carlisle], murders them, and engages in necrophiliac practices with their corpses to be a normal heterosexual. How sad!

Of course I never spoke with Bundy personally. We corresponded. I’ve published those letters.

Regarding a “personal agenda,” you’re just throwing words around. They sound good but lack any substance. Be specific. What agenda? Are you trying to say I arranged for these murders so that I could later connect with the killer and say “I told you so?”

On Tuesday I posted a brief comment presenting certain facts and my resulting conclusion in a discussion on Sullivan’s Facebook page. The comment was both appropriate and relevant to the subject, Ted Bundy’s interview with James Dobson.

Sullivan’s response was to immediately block my access to his page and to remove my comment. He has the right to do that. It is his page.

The exercising of a right comes with consequences. I believe that, in this instance, Sullivan’s actions undermine his integrity as an author. He has demonstrated that, if he has the power to do so, he will not hesitate to conceal facts he does not want his readers to know and suppress points of view he does not want his readers to discuss.

One has to trust those who offer to educate or enlighten us. Those who engage in concealment or censorship do not deserve that trust. One can only wonder what else they are hiding.

I’m not hiding facts, Richard. You’ve trashed the last three books I’ve written and we’re not friends. Friends don’t trash their friends books. They don’t have to agree with them, but they don’t trash them, giving each one one star! And to be honest, I thought I had unfriended you after you trashed my second book, and I was surprised when your comment showed up. What would you do, Richard, if you’d have written three books and I trashed them? Open your eyes and see this for what it is.

“I thought I had unfriended you after you trashed my second book, and I was surprised when your comment showed up.”

So you made a mistake. Deal with it as it is. Don’t cover it up. This is not the first time you’ve done that. That you also removed facts from the thread will persistently suggest that you had an ulterior motive.”

“What would you do, Richard, if you’d have written three books and I trashed them?”

What would you do if you had been invited by a forum moderator to discuss your book and you were instead met with a fusillade of unfounded personal attacks? I am not delusional, I am not touched in the head, and I am not so stupid that a poorly educated prisoner can play me. You were right. I did not like that one.

You unfriended me, it wasn’t the other way around. This is personal for you, not for me. I have reviewed you books harshly but honestly.

In my first review I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I overlooked you tendency to speculate, particularly about the escapes.

My review of your second book cited your failure to accept new evidence. You limited your evidence to what you found in your original research. You ignored statements from bona-fide witnesses and other new evidence that came up later. You can’t write history with an eraser. So I demonstrated that, fully researched, what you called a rabbit trail turned out to be a roadway that ran to the end of Bundy’s life. There’s nothing personal in criticizing you for that.

You third book would have been a three-star except for your overstating the scope of your work and violating your own rule about speculation. You should have left the Hagen stuff out. Again that is a legitimate criticism. It is not personal.

I was astonished by your Gainesville story. You well knew of my involvement with the killer but did not even seek my advice. Any good researcher of this case would know that officials and others in Gainesville feel, “that talking about [the killer] glorified him somehow … and it’s painful for the family members who survived the loss of their loved ones.” That means that authors should refer to the killer only as a “deranged drifter” and ignore his back-story. Bobby and I expended a lot of effort fighting for these families so, of course, I had to chew you out for your bull-in-a-china-shop approach.

Damn, aren´t you a pedantic little ****
Nobody in his right mind would let someone who has already trashed 2 of his books, and thus clearly has a personal agenda, stay friended in FB, just for him to do some more thrashing. If you didn´t like the first book, review it and don´t buy another one. If you buy 3 (Three!!) books and you trash them all its clear that you are just a pathetic little person stalking the writer. For him to defriend you and delete your (no doubt very negative, if not slanderous) comment isn´t a sign of it “being personal”, thats all in your, seemingly paranoid, mind. Its a sound decision. You on the other hand clearly have a personal problem with the writer, hence the stalking on FB and now here.

The last paragraph of your comment doesn´t even warrant an response, you seem to consider yourself in charge of what other people can and cannot write about?

Maybe open your eyes yourself, and consider a visit to someone with whom to talk through your personal problems instead of roaming the internet to leave bad reviews of writers you´ve already thrashed twice before, but who´s books you apparently keep buying.

I’ve followed this thread for quite some time now. I’ve read all 3 of your Bundy books and thought it was time to reach out to you and thank you for your efforts and praise your works as I’ve been interested in Bundy for quite a while.

I’m sure if I thought about it, I’d have a million questions but they seem to have mostly been answered here.

Kevin,
I’m just about done with Dielenberg’s book. In the book, there is a 2015 interview where Bob Hayward states that he drove fast to Brock Street and saw (as he would soon learn) Ted sitting in his VW in front of a house where two teenaged girls were staying up late because their parents (friends of Bob) were out of town.
Is there any indication that Bundy knew they were alone and intended to attack them, or did he just happen to stop to smoke a joint near that house then “rabbited” when Hayward appeared out of nowhere?

I’m just now seeing this so sorry for the delay in getting back with you.

I’ve heard the stories of the girls, but personally, I don’t place a lot of stock in them. Bundy was absolutely searching for a victim that night, as he had the passenger seat removed and laying on the backseat. His murder kit was out with the contents spilling out. He was ready for action, as it were. He lied, of course, and later denied that he was hunting for a victim.

All that said, I believe he was lost and tired, and that he fired up another joint. Hayward, who was coming home, and whose neighborhood had experienced a rash of burglaries, was determined to check the VW out. That’s what I believe happened, and despite the other stories, I went with that for The Bundy Murders.

Just wanted to ask if anyone came across the transcripts of the Utah confession tape. English is not my mother language and with that quality I am only able to discern maybe half of it or less. So transcripts would help a lot. Doesn anyone know where to find them? Google doesn’t help much.

Kevin,
This is an email test.
I sent an email to you on 28 February, 2018 and have not received an acknowledgement.
This seems highly irregular to me, based on our past correspondence when you normally responded promptly.
Have you received my messages? I’m trying to determine if my computer is functioning properly.
Are you on vacation, are you ill? What’s the story?

Kevin,
I’m just about done with Dielenberg’s book. In the book, there is a 2015 interview where Bob Hayward states that he drove fast to Brock Street and saw (as he would soon learn) Ted sitting in his VW in front of a house where two teenaged girls were staying up late because their parents (friends of Bob) were out of town.
Is there any indication that Bundy knew they were alone and intended to attack them, or did he just happen to stop to smoke a joint near that house then “rabbited” when Hayward appeared out of nowhere?

I’ve also wondered about this. As usual, a place where there’s two girls alone… with Bundy nearby… is too coincidental for me. Highly possible he’d been stalking them, like he had with the Dunwoody St girl (Cheryl Thomas?) in Florida in ’78. I always believed he was casing the place out, unsure as to how many people were actually in the home which is why he still hadnt had any luck by 2am (or whatever time it was when he ‘rabbited’). No proof at all of course, just what I think.

One thing that is evident from watching that 2015 drive along with Bob Hayward, is that a few things he says during that interview don’t quite line up with the record. This is not unusual for folks who are talking about events four decades after the fact. Mistakes are made, and you have to figure this out as best as possible. I have no personal info on the “girls” as he mentioned, so who knows?! Bundy was hunting that night; that’s a certainty. But when Hayward spotted him I don’t think he was casing a house because of some girls. I think he was sitting there trying to figure out his way home and was smoking a joint.

Really?? That’s what HE told the court. Dressed in dark clothing, with the passenger seat in the back, and his murder kit with him, suggests he might’ve been doing anything other than figuring out how to get home.

On Saturday, March 3, props from “Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile” will be sold from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at a warehouse at 706 York St., Newport, KY. The props include vintage clothing and a wide variety of things associated with the filming will be sold. The movie now ends the shooting that was done in Northern Kentucky.

Just a quick question for you Kevin-in all the books I have read on Bundy there are conflicting reports about Ted being left at the home where he was born-the Burlington place…do you know whether she left there with Ted when she had him or did she leave him there alone and return for him a few months later? I would guess that she left with him because it is spoken of as a birth place for unwed mothers and not an adoption agency, however, maybe they did have mothers who were able to leave their babies there for adoption to be handled as well?
Thanks in advance,

I don’t believe I was able to conclusively determine if she left him for a time or not. I believe I mention both scenarios in The Bundy Murders, and that’s about it. There are a few areas like this pertaining to his early life, where a bit of a question remains, and that’s unfortunate. At the time, having a definitive answer one way or another wasn’t all that important to me so I didn’t spend a lot of time on it. I hope this helps.

You know, I knew that if I spent some real time investigating, I could absolutely discover the truth. But the issue was this: In writing The Bundy Murders, it was a 2 1/2 year marathon -nights, weekends, with little spare time – of exhaustive research, interviewing, and writing. And so, it was in my view, imperative to cut away anything I deemed not important enough to pursue. He was a baby, and while I understand bonding, I didn’t think that, even if she left him, it was a contributing factor to what happened. So I quickly passed by it.

Kevin: there just ain’t no way one person can ferret out every detail on TB. I have been worrying over this question ever since I started researching and I feel like I’ve got a definitive answer now, but did this affect Bundy and help him to turn out the way he did? Only God knows the answer to that. I think it did contribute, but it’s just my opinion. and opinions are like belly buttons, everybody’s got one and everybody’s is different.

As to causes of psychopathy, generally abused and neglected children who develop ASPD display less premeditated and cold crimes and more rage filled, violent ones. The higher the (psychopathy) personality scores, the more genetic influences are to blame. Here’s an interesting study if you haven’t read it yet. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2242349/

That initial bonding process between an infant and its mother that develops over the first three months of its life is so crucial and important to the development of the baby – it’s where a human first learns love, nurture and emotion. Bundy was deprived of this at this crucial juncture at the beginning of his life. While this doesn’t make everyone a ‘serial killer’, I firmly believe this was the ‘seed’ on which all his abnormal ‘festering of the mind’ watered the seed (by that I mean whatever antisocial and violent things he witnessed in his grandfathers home from there on). He always said he didn’t understand normal human emotions, but he certainly was drawn to terrorising of females early. While I totally get Kevin not wanting to get bogged down in all this, to a psychiatrist these beginnings are very telling.

I’ve been trying to find a definitive answer to this question. Like a lot of things about TB, it’s hard to absolutely pin down. Myra MacPherson was a journalist who spoke with Louise Bundy and Louise’s sisters and wrote an article for the May 1989 Vanity Fair issue. MacPherson wrote: “For 2 months, Ted was left at the home, without his mother, as the Cowells seriously debated whether to give him up for adoption.” then MacPhersons writes “It was her father, Louise says, who wanted her to keep the boy.”

so the way that’s phrased tells me that the story came from Louise herself. and yes, the home was an adoption agency.

Thanks for replying. So it would seem he was left there. Just one more thing in a long list of things that a lot of people think are reasons why Ted became what he became. I’m not sure what I believe when it comes to why he was the way he was, all i know for sure is he was pure evil and apparently NOT AT ALL NORMAL…

I don’t think he was ever normal. he was a psychopath and I am not an expert, but from what I’ve read, p-paths are p-paths from the time they’re born. Louise always insisted that he was normal until he left her home. maybe he did seem normal to her, who grew up in a home parented by two mentally ill people.

I can’t express the joy and intellectual satisfaction I have received since the day when, out of the blue, I discovered this discussion, this treasure trove, this encyclopedia of information. Kevin I trust you intend to support and nurture this fond of knowledge and forum of free and open expression. I truly believe that, while there is probably not much left out there to learn about Bundy, there are still many amateur detectives who have not read the books and may have interesting insights on the case.

Kevin hang in there, you are doing a great job and, I have some interesting (at least to me) visuals and ideas to share with the group.

Kevin, I’ve been lurking for 10 years, posted 1 or 2 questions, bought every one of your books, religiously still stop by here every few weeks. Larry G says….let’s keep it going! And thank you for everything you’ve done for so long!

Thank you, Larry G! I really do appreciate the kind words. And thanks for being a faithful lurker lol! I know you’re not the only one. I look forward to “chairing” this discussion for many more years, and I’m glad you’ll be sticking with us.

Wow. I just heard that Jim Parsons who plays Sheldon on the Big Bang theory is going to play in the new Ted Bundy movie! Apparently he is going to play the role of Larry Simpson, the prosecutor in Florida. Will be interesting to see him in a role that is serious.

You’re welcome. I usually don’t watch the more recent t.v. series, I am old school and like to watch reruns of reruns of reruns from the seventies and eighties shows lol, but The Big Bang Theory is one of my exceptions.

Wow, I can’t wait to see the movie. It might just turn out to be the best one yet with the great list of actors they already have. James Hetfield being in it is a surprise as well. Saw him in concert with Guns and Roses years ago in 1992, Metallica opened for them. I am no longer a fan of that kind of music, but it will be interesting to see if he can act.

Kevin, is there any reason why Mike Fisher doesn’t appear (identified) in any photographs? Among the plethora of Bundy books, many detectives from Keppel to Thompson to Dunn to Chapman are presented in photos. Mike is like the comedian from the eighties with the paper bag over his head: the unknown comic. I’m asking because over the years, I’ve seen numerous photographs of Bundy in custody in Colorado and among them he’s always presented with a short looking man with big glasses and a bigger mustache. I’ve always suspected that this was Fisher, as the lawman looks like he isn’t about to let Bundy out of his sight for a second. What is confusing is that in one of the photographs (the famous one taken the day he leapt out of court) this same officer is wearing blues, which could also mean to me he might just be a deputy of some sort. In other photos, such as the one I’m offering below, he is wearing a south-western button-down. So how about it? Is this the Fish? And, if so, do you know any reason why Fisher never presented himself for photography in the many years and books that were written about this case?

There is a really good picture of Mike in the the first edition of The Only Living Witness. It’s the hard copy, and he’s sitting at his desk. There’s also a good pic of Jerry Thompson standing and either making copies, or standing at a file drawer.

I had the same thought when I first saw that pic you posted (years ago), but that’s not Mike, as it appears that’s the uniform-type shirt that the guy behind him is wearing as well. I took a pic of that staircase when I was in the courthouse in 2015 and it hasn’t changed a bit.

You’re correct – there aren’t enough pics of Mike out there. The same goes for Jerry Thompson.

“Before ascending the wooden steps, Rolling, already dressed all in black, pulled out a brown ski mask and slipped it over his face. He then put on gloves, all the while keeping his eyes on #113. Inside, Sonja and Christina were fast asleep, Christina on the first-floor sofa and Sonja upstairs. It was now 3:00 a.m. Very quietly Rolling climbed the steps and retrieved from his bag a screwdriver and a penlight. After trying to pry open the door, he discovered the door was unlocked.”

Actor Zac Efron will start shooting a thriller movie called “Extremely Wicked, Shocking Evil And Vile” which is about the late serial killer Ted Bundy’s life but from the view of his former date Elizabeth Kloepfer.
The movie will start shooting in the Northern Kentucky area as well as in Cincinnati Ohio this month.
Efron will play the role of the late Ted Bunday and Lily Collins will play the role of Elizabeth Kloepfer.

Filming is being done as we speak in the Covington suburb of Elsmere KY.

I just finished watching the Showtime documentary series “Cold Blooded – The Clutter Family Murders”, and was struck by how badly misrepresented the Clutter family was in Truman Capote’s book “In Cold Blood” and the movie (1967) and TV miniseries (1997) that were based on the book. It never ceases to amaze me how in so many true crime books, the victims are seemingly pushed into the background.

What does this have to do with Ted Bundy? Basically my point is that the same goes for him and his victims. By design, of course, to report on the crimes, the focus should be on the perp. And Bundy is, by himself, a fascinating case study is criminal psychopathy. But what about his victims? I hate that they are so often portrayed (not by you in any of your books, of course, but by society at large) as little more than “Bundy’s Women”. They were not BUNDY’S WOMEN, they were individual distinct human beings, with lives, loves, cares, families of their own and should be viewed as such.

I know you said that you are through with doing books on Bundy, but maybe you could consider doing one about one or a couple of his victims. Tell their life stories, before Bundy. Or maybe suggest the topic to a fellow author. Maybe pick the victims (seemingly) most talked about, such as Georgeann Hawkins, Denise Naslund and/or Melissa Smith.

Please don’t take this rant as somehow a criticism of your work. It certainly isn’t. I’ve enjoyed your books. I just think it’s time these women and girls had their stories fully told.

No, I don’t think you’re being critical of me or my work. And you’re not the first to suggest a greater look into the lives of the victims. When I was writing The Bundy Murders, I purposely added lots of info on them (where possible), and a good number of folks who’ve read the book recognize this.

Again, after 3 books and over 600 pages, I have finished my writing on Bundy, the victims and the case. I still do documentaries, radio shows and podcasts, and that’s fine, but there won’t be any more Bundy books from me. And as to suggesting others writers look into it, that’s not what writers do.

Perhaps one day someone will write a book about the victims, but that might prove problematic. Numerous friends of the victims won’t talk, even today. Getting enough NEW info to fill a book would be difficult indeed. For the foreseeable future, the occasional article or blog with turn up something – just as I have new, never-before published testimonies from those who knew Bundy in all three of my books. But outside of that, I don’t expect very much to come forth. Maybe i’m wrong, but we’ll see.

Oh, and one more thing: If Bill Hagmaier ever writes that book we talked about once, I’ll be the first in line to get it lol!

Agreed. All Weiner does is perpetuate the Ted mythology. Of all the women attracted to Ted in their weird way, she’s by far the most irresponsible and unethical. In the position she held and the power she wielded, she should have had her head screwed on and not given into his charms. She’s part of the minority that excuses what he did.

Writing anything of substance about Bundy’s victims is impossible – thy were all taken long before they’d really achieved anything in life – how much can you write about someone from the ages of 12 to 26? It’s a sad truth, but true nonetheless.

i agree that there ought to be more said about the young women victimized by TB, but there just isn’t much way to do more than has already been done. as a writer working on a TB project, i would love to say more about them, but the only way that i can think of would be to try to talk to families and people who knew them. And i am not willing to bother those people. they are sick, i’m sure, of anything pertaining to TB.

the only thing i’ve thought of is to try to intelligently speculate on the lives they might have lived. i have also written some about the times in which they lived, that aftermath of the 60’s that was still in the air in the early 70’s.

I agree that famous murderers’ victims are often overlooked and it’s a crying shame.

I saw a wonderful article on the 50th anniversary of Richard Speck’s mass murder of those nurses, and it was all about the nurses’ lives instead of their deaths and Richard Speck’s actions.

The reporter found old photos of them and interviewed family members and presented each person, a promising young woman, a life snuffed out, and it was really beautiful. The article really did a great job but the victims’ families shouldn’t have had to wait 50 years for it.